Renal Hematoma after Ureteroscopy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Incidence,Risk Factors,and Management Strategies—Application of the REVEAL Framework from EAU Endourology
Restricted accessReview articleFirst published online June, 2026
Renal Hematoma after Ureteroscopy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Incidence,Risk Factors,and Management Strategies—Application of the REVEAL Framework from EAU Endourology
To determine the incidence, risk factors, and clinical predictors of subcapsular renal hematoma (SRH) and perirenal hematoma (PRH) after ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) using a structured multilevel evidence synthesis (Rare Events Valuation through Evidence-based And Layered synthesis [REVEAL] framework).
Methods:
A systematic review and multilevel analysis were conducted according to PRISMA and a registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD420251085350). Literature searches (2000–2025) identified studies reporting SRH/PRH after URS/RIRS. A three-step framework was applied: meta-analysis (MA) of incidence using generalized linear mixed-effects models; MA of risk factors from comparative studies; and individual patient data (IPD) synthesis from case series and reports, followed by prognostic model development and nomogram construction.
Results:
Fifteen studies, including 23,258 patients and 74 hematomas, were included. The pooled incidence of SRH/PRH was 0.42% (95% confidence interval: 0.22–0.79%), with slightly higher rates after RIRS (0.8%) compared with URS (0.4%). Stone size, longer operative time, hydronephrosis, and elevated intrarenal pressure were associated with increased risk. IPD analysis of 54 patients identified fever as the strongest predictor of unsuccessful conservative management. A multivariable model incorporating age, fever, hematoma length, hemoglobin drop, and time to presentation achieved strong discrimination and was translated into a prognostic nomogram to estimate individualized risk.
Conclusions:
SRH and PRH are rare but clinically significant complications of URS and RIRS. Using the REVEAL framework, we integrated heterogeneous evidence, identified technical and clinical risk factors, and developed the first prognostic tool for individualized risk stratification. Validation in multicenter prospective studies is required before clinical implementation.
GBD 2021 Urolithiasis Collaborators. The global, regional, and national burden of urolithiasis in 204 countries and territories, 2000–2021: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. EClinicalMedicine, 2024; 78:102924; doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102924
2.
Juliebø-JonesP, KellerEX, HauglandJN, et al.Advances in Ureteroscopy: New technologies and current innovations in the era of Tailored Endourological Stone Treatment (TEST). Journal of Clinical Urology, 2023; 16(3):190–198; doi: 10.1177/20514158221115986
3.
JahrreissV, NedbalC, CastellaniD, et al.Is suction the future of endourology? Overview from EAU Section of Urolithiasis. Ther Adv Urol, 2024; 16:17562872241232275; doi: 10.1177/17562872241232275
4.
TalyshinskiiA, HameedBMZ, NaikN, et al.Being all-seeing gymnast within kidney cavity: Analysis of the optical and flexibility characteristics trends of 61 flexible ureteroscopes over four decades. Urolithiasis, 2024; 52(1):92; doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01591-2
5.
KwanJL, CalderLA, BowmanCL, et al.Characteristics and contributing factors of diagnostic error in surgery: Analysis of closed medico-legal cases and complaints in Canada. Can J Surg, 2024; 67(1):E58–E65; doi: 10.1503/cjs.003523
6.
MitsogiannisIC, KostakopoulosNA, LazarouL, et al.Renal Hematomas After Ureterolithotripsy: Report of Four Cases. J Endourol Case Rep, 2020; 6(1):26–29; doi: 10.1089/cren.2019.0103
7.
ChunFK-H, BrigantiA, KarakiewiczPI, et al.Should we use nomograms to predict outcome? Eur Urol (Suppl 2008); 7(5):396–399; doi: 10.1016/j.eursup.2008.01.011
8.
StreetonR, CookeM, CampbellJ. Researching the researchers: Using a snowballing technique. Nurse Res, 2004; 12(1):35–46; doi: 10.7748/nr2004.07.12.1.35.c5929
9.
CollinsGS, ReitsmaJB, AltmanDG, et al.Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement. BMC Med, 2015; 13(1):1–10; doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0241-z
10.
WolffRF, MoonsKGM, RileyRD, et al.; PROBAST Group†. PROBAST: A tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Intern Med, 2019; 170(1):51–58; doi: 10.7326/m18-1376
11.
BarkerTH, HasanoffS, AromatarisE, et al.The revised JBI critical appraisal tool for the assessment of risk of bias for analytical cross-sectional studies. JBI Evid Synth, 2025; doi: 10.11124/jbies-24-00523
12.
SterneJAC, SavovićJ, PageMJ, et al.RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Bmj, 2019; 366:l4898; doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898
13.
SterneJA, HernánMA, ReevesBC, et al.ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Bmj, 2016; 355:i4919; doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4919
14.
CampobassoD, GrandeM, FerrettiS, et al.Subcapsular renal hematoma after retrograde ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy: Our experience. Minerva Urol Nefrol, 2018; 70(6):617–623; doi: 10.23736/s0393-2249.18.03199-5
15.
MahmoodSN, ToffeqH, FakhralddinS. Sheathless and fluoroscopy-free retrograde intrarenal surgery: An attractive way of renal stone management in high-volume stone centers. Asian J Urol, 2020; 7(3):309–317; doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2019.07.003
16.
OzgurBC, EkiciM, BaykamMM, et al.Efficiency and Safety of The Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in Younger Compared to Elderly Patients. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak, 2020; 30(5):508–511; doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2020.05.508
17.
MaugeriO, DalmassoE, PerettiD, et al.Stone free rate and clinical complications in patients submitted to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS): Our experience in 571 consecutive cases. Arch Ital Urol Androl, 2021; 93(3):313–317; doi: 10.4081/aiua.2021.3.313
18.
YuJ, LiB, RenBX, et al.Subcapsular renal haematoma after ureteroscopic lithotripsy: A single-centre, retrospective study in China. BMJ Open, 2022; 12(11):e062866; doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062866
19.
TaoW, MingX, ZangY, et al.The clinical outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL) for treatment of the upper urinary tract calculi. J Xray Sci Technol, 2022; 30(1):123–133; doi: 10.3233/xst-210992
20.
GiulioniC, FuligniD, BroccaC, et al.Evaluating the Safety of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS): Intra- and Early Postoperative Complications in Patients Enrolled in the Global Multicentre Flexible Ureteroscopy Outcome Registry (FLEXOR). Int Braz J Urol, 2024; 50(4):459–469; doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2024.0055
21.
LuX, ChenY, CaoW, et al.A rare complication after ureterorenoscopy lithotripsy: Subcapsular renal hematoma. Urol J, 2025; 92(1):174–181; doi: 10.1177/03915603241292842
22.
ChiuPKF, ChanCK, MaWK, et al.Subcapsular hematoma after ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. J Endourol, 2013; 27(9):1115–1119; doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0128
23.
MengH, ChenS, ChenG, et al.Renal subcapsular hemorrhage complicating ureterolithotripsy: An unknown complication of a known day-to-day procedure. Urol Int, 2013; 91(3):335–339; doi: 10.1159/000350891
24.
KozminskiMA, KozminskiDJ, RobertsWW, et al.Symptomatic subcapsular and perinephric hematoma following ureteroscopic lithotripsy for renal calculi. J Endourol, 2015; 29(3):277–282; doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0176
25.
TaoW, CaiCJ, SunCY, et al.Subcapsular renal hematoma after ureteroscopy with holmium: Yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy. Lasers Med Sci, 2015; 30(5):1527–1532; doi: 10.1007/s10103-015-1760-3
26.
BaiJ, LiC, WangS, et al.Subcapsular renal haematoma after holmium: Yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser ureterolithotripsy. BJU Int, 2012; 109(8):1230–1234; doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2011.10490.x
27.
JinhuaD, WanlinD. Retrospective analysis of stone basket combined with flexible ureteroscope holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of lower calyceal stones. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci, 2022; 26(10):3430–3436; doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202205_28836
28.
KaoMH, WangCC. Risk factors for developing a perirenal hematoma after flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Urol Sci, 2016; 27(3):166–170; doi: 10.1016/j.urols.2015.09.003
29.
OzgurBC, EkiciM. A Novel Complication Following Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Retroperitoneal Hematoma. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak, 2019; 29(4):384–386; doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2019.04.384
30.
YahsiS, TonyaliS, CeylanC, et al.Intraparenchymal hematoma as a late complication of retrograde intrarenal surgery. Int Braz J Urol, 2017; 43(2):367–370; doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0121
31.
AlrabadiA, MansiH, AlhamssS, et al.Huge perinephric hematoma after ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy for ureteral stone; a life-threatening rare complication: Case report and review of literature. Int J Surg Case Rep, 2020; 75:357–360; doi: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2020.09.036
32.
TalwarHS, PanwarVK, NarainTA, et al.Subcapsular Renal Hematoma Following Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy: An Uncommon Complication of a Common Procedure-A Report of Two Cases. J Endourol Case Rep, 2020; 6(3):244–247; doi: 10.1089/cren.2020.0055
33.
ZhangP, HuWL. Sudden onset of a huge subcapsular renal hematoma following minimally invasive ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy: A case report. Exp Ther Med, 2015; 10(1):335–337; doi: 10.3892/etm.2015.2460
34.
SkolarikosA, GeraghtyR, SomaniB, et al.European Association of Urology Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Urolithiasis. Eur Urol, 2025; 88(1):64–75; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2025.03.011
35.
WhitehurstLA, SomaniBK. Perirenal Hematoma after Ureteroscopy: A Systematic Review. J Endourol, 2017; 31(5):438–445; doi: 10.1089/end.2016.0832
36.
HodisHN, MackWJ, HendersonVW, et al.; ELITE Research Group. Vascular Effects of Early versus Late Postmenopausal Treatment with Estradiol. N Engl J Med, 2016; 374(13):1221–1231; doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1505241
37.
GiulioniC, BroccaC, GauharV, et al.Does age impact outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery in the elderly? Results from 366 patients from the FLEXible ureteroscopy outcomes registry (FLEXOR). Aging Clin Exp Res, 2023; 35(11):2711–2719; doi: 10.1007/s40520-023-02545-1
38.
GeraghtyR, AbourmarzoukO, RaiB, et al.Evidence for ureterorenoscopy and laser fragmentation (URSL) for large renal stones in the modern era. Curr Urol Rep, 2015; 16(8):54; doi: 10.1007/s11934-015-0529-3
39.
WhitehurstL, PietropaoloA, GeraghtyR, et al.Factors affecting operative time during ureteroscopy and stone treatment and its effect on outcomes: Retrospective results over 6.5 years. Ther Adv Urol, 2020; 12:1756287220934403; doi: 10.1177/1756287220934403
40.
KimGH, JungG, SuhJ, et al.A newly developed hematuria grading system may predict the status of stone-free and acute pyelonephritis of minimally invasive renal stone surgery. J Clin Med, 2023; 12(8):2820; doi: 10.3390/jcm12082820
41.
AlshoabiSA, BinnuhaidAA, AlmohtadiAM, et al.Association between nephrolith size and location and grade of hydronephrosis. Life (Basel), 2025; 15(2):321; doi: 10.3390/life15020321
42.
AkgülM, ÇakırH, ÇinarÖ, et al.The efficacy and safety of retrograde intrarenal surgery: A Multi-Center Experience of the RIRSearch Group Study. jus, 2023; 10(2):119–128; doi: 10.4274/jus.galenos.2023.2022.0039
43.
LazarovichA, HaramatyR, ShveroA, et al.Primary Ureteroscopy without Pre-Stenting for Proximal Ureteral Stones—Is It Feasible? Life (Basel), 2023; 13(10):2019; doi: 10.3390/life13102019
44.
ÖzmanO, AkgülHM, BaşataçC, et al.; RIRSearch Study Group. Multi-aspect analysis of ureteral access sheath usage in retrograde intrarenal surgery: A RIRSearch group study. Asian J Urol, 2024; 11(1):80–85; doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2021.11.004
45.
PietropaoloA, JonesP, WhitehurstL, et al.Role of ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ using a high-powered (100 W) laser machine in the treatment of large stones (≥ 15 mm): Prospective outcomes over 16 months. Urolithiasis, 2019; 47(4):391–394; doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1076-4
46.
KarkanMF, GhiasyS, RanjbarA, et al.Evaluation of 200 Mm, 365 Mm and 500 Mm Fibers of Ho:YAG Laser in transurethral lithotripsy of ureteral: A randomize control trial. J Lasers Med Sci, 2017; 9(1):69–72; doi: 10.15171/jlms.2018.14
47.
SchoppinkJJ, Alvarez-ChavezJA, RivasDF. Laser beam properties and microfluidic confinement control thermocavitation. Appl Phys Lett, 2024; 124(1); doi: 10.1063/5.0186998
48.
NedbalC, YuenSKK, AkramM, et al.First clinical evaluation of a flexible digital ureteroscope with direct in scope suctioning system (Pusen DISS 7.5Ch): prospective multicentric feasibility study. World J Urol, 2024; 42(1):560; doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05275-9
49.
GauharV, TraxerO, CastellaniD, et al.Could use of a flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath be a potential game-changer in retrograde intrarenal surgery? Outcomes at 30 days from a large, prospective, multicenter, real-world study by the european association of urology urolithiasis group. Eur Urol Focus, 2024; 10(6):975–982; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2024.05.010
50.
YuenSKK, ZhongW, ChanYS, et al.; Global Research on Intra-renal Pressure Collaborative Group. Current utility, instruments, and future directions for intra-renal pressure management during ureteroscopy: Scoping review by global research in intra-renal pressure collaborative group initiative. Ther Adv Urol, 2025; 17:17562872251314809; doi: 10.1177/17562872251314809
51.
LiR, YeJJ, GanL, et al.Traumatic inflammatory response: pathophysiological role and clinical value of cytokines. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2024; 50(4):1313–1330; doi: 10.1007/s00068-023-02388-5
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
